Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Why Some Right-Wing Christians Love Ron Paul (And Why Liberals Really Shouldn't)

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 29, 2011, 2:35 p.m. EST by XaiverBuchsIV (508)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Ron Paul is lining up Christian conservative support, one more sign that many progressives give Paul way too much credit.

Ron Paul, who is against drug prohibition, believes that states should be able to lock up people for drug possession:

Q: In your 1988 campaign you said, “All drugs should be decriminalized. Drugs should be distributed by any adult to other adults. There should be no controls on production, supply or purchase for adults.” Is that still your position?

A: Yeah. It’s sort of like alcohol. Alcohol’s a deadly drug, kills more people than anything else. And today the absurdity on this war on drugs has just been horrible. Now the federal government takes over and overrules states where state laws permit medicinal marijuana 1 for people dying of cancer. The federal government goes in and arrests these people, put them in prison with mandatory sentences. This war on drugs is totally out of control. If you want to regulate cigarettes and alcohol and drugs, it should be at the state level. That’s where I stand on it. The federal government has no prerogatives on this.

Q: But you would decriminalize it?

A: I would, at the federal level. I don’t have control over the states. And that’s why the Constitution’s there.

I guess I just don't see why that is considered to be libertarian. Just because you break up state power into fifty entities instead of one, it doesn't make their infringements on liberty ok, does it? On a philosophical and ideological level, libertarians should be clear that infringements of people's rights should never be subject to the whims of the state --- whether it's Hawaii or the United States of America. So why doesn't Ron Paul say this? There's no reason that his quixotic career couldn't also entail a drive to change the constitution, or ensure that all 50 states overturn drug prohibition. He has nothing to lose by stating the libertarian principles and saying that basic individual rights are inalienable.

But he doesn't. He defends states' rights to infringe on individual liberty as being under the Constitution but what he's really defending are the Articles of Confederation. This isn't libertarianism. It's "tentherism" disguised as libertarianism.

3 Comments

3 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by BlueRose (1437) 2 years ago

Ron Paul wants the Fed to have zero power basically. So when he says he doesn't want the Fed "controlling peoples lives", that does NOT mean he doesn't want the STATES to ban the very same activity! Too many naive voters fall for this trick!

[-] 2 points by XaiverBuchsIV (508) 2 years ago

He's a corporate tool, even more extreme than most Republicans. Republicans want to be able to extort money from corporations for favorable treatment. Ron Paul wants to eliminate all Federal regulation. This would end protections such as child labor laws, equal rights, etc. and leave it up to the states to defend themselves from enormously rich and powerful corporate interests.

Corporations vs. Sates: No contest. That's the Ron Paul plan.

[-] 2 points by Jehovah (113) 2 years ago

Ron Paul is a false Messiah.